Self-Identity In Luigi Pirandello’s Six Characters In .

J Nov. Appl Sci., 3 (7): 777-782, 2014of Psychoanalysis, Jean Laplanche and Jean-Bertrand Pontalis declare that the term ‘identification’, with its bothcommon and philosophical usage and in psychoanalytic language, is used by Freud in order to identify the notion ofself-identity. They believe that in Freud’s view “identification in the sense of the procedure whereby the relationshipof similitude—the ‘just-as-if’ relationship—is expressed through a substitution of one image for another” what isdescribed by Freud as characteristic of the dream-work (Laplanche and Pontalis, 206). In Freudian view ‘identifyyourself’ and ‘identify oneself’ are moving in parallel. In his work, “the concept of identification, comes little by little tohave the central importance which makes it, not simply one physical mechanism among others, but the operationitself whereby the human subject is constituted”( Laplanche and Pontalis, 206).As Freud has claimed, if man believes in what is described as ‘multiple personality’ that caused differentidentifications in the unconscious part of an individual, man may come to some disruptions about the concept of egoand when he believes that in all human being there are many persons, his view of identity can change. He believedthat distances in an individual’s identity and his ego are some barriers between the notions of “id” and “ego” and hismore developed “I” or the “superego” (Freud, 1962).Accordingly, through Freud’s psychoanalytical views, the problem of self-identity, in its complete meaning, isa mixture of the conscious or unconscious of each individual which shows that the identity of all persons come fromtheir beliefs and their experiences of truth. He also believes that when man can answer this question that what is theillusion and what is the reality, then he may answer this question that who he really is. This paper focuses on theconcepts of identity based on Freud’s approaches on illusion, reality and identity, as their borderline.Self- identity: “the illusions of a reality”Exploration in the human’s mind and seeking for a way to escape away from the scared of overhanging inillusion is an old problem, as old as the history, but Luigi Pirandello like his contemporaries, tried to face modernindividuals with the relative concept of recognition and more exact self-recognition. His attempts were to examinefixed notions in order to reconstruct new believers. He used different features of expression to show that “the life isfull of infinite absurdities” and that an individual comes “to life in many forms, in many shapes, as tree, as a stone,as water, as butterfly and as a woman” (Six Characters, 11) in order to put emphasis on the illusion of a reality herenamed identity. The unknown reality of the life and the illusion of known identity are both challenged by Pirandello.The characters in this play are divided into two groups; the actors who pretend to be in a kind of delusion without anyspecial identity who “want to be. They pretend to be” (Six Characters, 30) real persons and as F. A. Bassanese, inUnderstanding Luigi Pirandello (1997) argues “whereas the Characters damned life through art, the Actor speaks ofillusion and the artful imitation of life within a tightly structured organism” (222). There are six family members whowere looking for an author to help them live even “for a moment” (Six Characters, 10). Two key characters, the fatherand the step-daughter although for different goals–looking for their authors, their ends, their identities in their lives todiscover their real ‘I’, in order to find a responsible factor for their sorrow, their regret and their disgust. They aresuffering from blindness and being alive “like a fool” (Six Characters, 22). The father, the central voice among thecharacters, believes in determining role, determined the identity of each character when he says: “the drama is inus” and “we act that role for which we have been cast, that role which we are given in life” (Six Characters, 10). Healso believes that no one—even if he can pretend in the best way—can get his role and identity and adds: “It will bedifficult to act me as I really am. The effect will be rather— apart from the make-up— according as to how he supposesI am, as he senses me— if he does senses me—and not as I inside of myself feel myself to be” (Six Characters, 32).The father believes in a character as a determined person born with his role in life with the duty of showing his rolein the scene of life:The Father. How can we understand each other if the words I use have the sense and the value I expect them tohave, but whoever is listening to me inevitably thinks that those same words have a different sense and value,because of the private world he has inside himself too. We think we understand each other: but we never do. (SixCharacters, 52).They want to interpret again crucial moments of their lives, claiming that they are truer than the real characters.The characters as that much real that no one can be in their part even for a moment and this self-identification as apersonal experience makes a character too different from an actor.None of the characters here have any nameable identity at all. They are suffering from being ‘nobody’ but theactors enjoy being ‘somebody’. The six characters hope to be able to draft their play and change the tragic result oftheir fixity to reality of their lives. In this play there is no name and all the characters just recognize each other bytheir life role, as ‘Mother’, ‘Father’, ‘Manager’ and even ‘Actors’. Moreover, the mother does not have a real identityat all. She is a nebulous character who is far from being perfect, that “her drama lies in her children” (Starkie, 208);a reproductive object or better to say, an Other rather than a M(other).779

J Nov. Appl Sci., 3 (7): 777-782, 2014The step-daughter—as the name shows—is not a real daughter and even though she plays the role of a sexualpartner—she is not a real one—she is not a real wife. The awareness of the father about his unreal self-identity andhis incompleteness makes him seek for an author. He is a middle-aged man who put an end to his mistakes, anddevoted his youth to his wrong decisions, to his desires but he is far away from his real role in life. He searches forhis soul, his mind, his reality and his “I” in order to escape from being nobody. He himself could not be a real husbandand a real father at all and it may cause a doubt in him to ask himself, his family and the others to help him find outwhat his real role in life is, or what he is living for. Although he is aware of the notion of the self-identity, the questionabout the modality of his “I” is what makes him distressed. He insists on being accepted as a representative of reality,a real person who desires to know who he is: “a character, sir, may always as a man who he is,” but he himself doesnot know actually who he is (Six Characters, 48).Pirandello believed that such kinds of suffering from the absence of self-knowledge may hurt just someindividual’s soul and mind, someone like the father, in society:The Father. I know that for many people this self-blinding seems much more ‘human’; but the contrary is really true[ ] the animals suffer without reasoning about their suffering. But take the case of a man who suffers and begins toreason about it. Oh no! It can’t be allowed! Let him suffer like an animal, and then–ah yet, he is ‘human’! (SixCharacters, 51).He wants to show how ‘living’ is different from ‘being alive’ and how self-recognition in this life might be theborderline of humanity and animality. In Freudian view, the animal part of the mind is ‘The Id’, the instinct-driven partthat motivates passions and emotions and also makes snap decisions (Freud, 1962: 24). Though as Pirandello claimssuffering without reasoning is like living like animals, just living with the unconscious part of the mind, without thinkingabout any transcendental being and the self-identification for those who want to save themselves from animality. Itis so much painful that some prefer to suffer like an animal and just some curious intellects—like the Father—and ina long process could stand that.Freud retained the concept of the rational ego, but subjugated it to three severe masters: the unconsciousinstincts, the punitive superego, and the demands of external reality. The notion of personal identity with this view isnot far from the situation Pirandello provides in his play. In this play there are six characters whose unconscious partof minds are superior to their rational part and they are all living with their emotions. But suffering from lack of identityand a reasoning mind makes the characters look for their authors in order to ask about their real “I”s.Freud believed that there is no need in childhood as strong as the need for a father’s protection and he alsobelieved in mother as the first object of love (Freud, 1920: 51). In this play, among Pirandello’s six characters, thechildren are never satisfied with their parent’s love, even their existence and they do not have any real parents at all.The Son never experiences his father’s love and also never feels his father’s existence in his life and as Freudbelieved, there is nothing more important than a father’s love for a son. Pirandello reconstructs the psychologicalview of self-identity through searching among illusion and reality and creates his characters confounded in their trippassing their id to ego and superego.The Real ‘I’ and the Unreal ‘I’Among Pirandello’s central themes, the problem of identity, the ambiguity of truth and reality, are comparedwith most of absurd dramatists who tried to show the meaninglessness of physical life. But Pirandello has openedthe door of hope with the key of intellect, the key of self-recognition. In this play, he does not want to show only thereality or unreality of life, but he goes further and emphasizes the wrong recognition of the reality of self-identity. Thisplay represents a life in which, although there is a play that must be played, there are no real actors and no realauthor at all; in contrast, there are real ‘I’s that play their actual role and the reality of their identity are in doubt. Thecharacters, in this play, are confusing the audience and they are finding themselves between the reality and illusion.It is also playing with the unconscious part of each audience because they are the real and unreal characters at thesame time. Witnesses of this charismatic play see some characters who are aware of their existences, their beingsand the big deception they are living in as the ‘Life’, but the greatest pain of living for nothing or living without beinganybody—or worse being nobody—makes them change their unreal “I”s to real “I”s.The dead kids here—moving like alive ones—make the depth of illusion deeper and on the other hand, theirsilent existence warns the audience about the silent realities around them, some ones or some things which aredumb and need to see more exactly. These mute kids reflect the determined and delusive notion of each individual’sidentity that has been projected on people in order to convince them accept some reality with no question about theirvalidity or modality. These dumb mobile kids may be symbols of realities in each person’s life which are moving withthem and can have an effect on their lives but in silence. Something like people’s self-identity, which is lives with allindividuals—or better to say which has been carried by them—often, may affect their real ‘I’s but unawareness aboutthis identity may cause them be drown in the pool of fate with no recognition about the goals of life. The contrast780

J Nov. Appl Sci., 3 (7): 777-782, 2014between the absolute solitude of the characters and the gap after recognizing the two kids’ death may make eachaudience ask him/herself that who I am really. By creating such a range between dead and alive characters,Pirandello creates an objective situation in which the identity missed its meaning. In this way, the play shows thedeep meaning of self-identity hanging between reality and illusion.In this play there are both fictional and real characters at the same time. The fictional and real father, mother,step-daughter and kids, but none of them can accept his/her existence or reality. The father cannot accept the roleof husband so he leaves his wife and goes away and then he cannot accept the role of father because he lives in animaginary world through making a kind of unreal identity for himself but he finds out that he cannot continue living inillusion:Father. Ah! Disdains debasing liaisons! Not old enough to do without women, and not young enough to go and lookfor one without shame. Misery? It is worse than misery; it’s a horror; [ ] and when a man feels this one ought todo without, you say? Yes, yes. I know. Each of us when he appears before his fellows is clothed in a certain dignity.But every man knows that uncomfortable things pass within the secretory of his own heart. (Six Characters, 18)the climax point of her sorrow and living in a world between illusion and reality of the happened event and in anunreal world she is living in:The Step-Daughter. Shame indeed! This is my revenge! I am dying to live that scene The room Here is thewindow with the mantles exposed, there the divan, the looking-glass, a screen, there in front of the window the littlemahogany table with the blue envelope containing one hundred lire. I see. I see. I could take hold of it. (SixCharacters, 14)On the other hand, one can see the ‘Mother’, who prefers to be hibernated in delusion of reality and to playthe role of a determining character without speaking, but just complaining; for this reason, she has the fewestdialogues in the play: “The mother is unaware that she is incomplete and not alive, and so totally fictional, fixed andpassive in her own world” (Styan, 81). The pressure on her common and traditional mind is too much more than whatshe can stand, so she prefers to live in the shadow of reality instead of reality and maybe she accepts to be “as tree,as a stone, as water, as butterfly and as a woman” (Six Characters, 11) because her weak, fragile and traditionalmind prefers to escape from her ego. The unreal “I” that she makes for herself is just a deception that helps herescape from finding reasons for her mistakes. She is nothing at all and never was because she always decidesbased on her emotions, and according to Freud, based on her unconscious part of her mind. She is not a real mother,real wife or even a real widow as Pirandello writes:The Manager [dumbfounded]. I don’t understand at all. What is the situation? Is this lady your wife? [To the father]The Father. Yes, gentleman: my wife.The Manager. But how can she be a widow if you are alive? (Six Characters, 12).She does not believe in herself as an “I” and she sees her individuality incomplete without the others. Shespeaks always about two dead kids, however, she is aware of their death, but as she says, the illusion of existenceof the kids makes her believe in herself or makes her feel alive: “They cling to me to keep up my torment actual andvivid for me. But for themselves, they don’t exist, they aren’t anymore” (Six Characters, 44).The actors even prefer their unreal identity because they will get rid of their unwanted desires and even satisfysome of their desires in a kind of illusive life. The woman actor prefers living in her role, instead of living with hercharacter because just in that way she could be the beloved of the male actor. Although there are no specialdialogues, there are a lot of acts created by Pirandello that shows his attempts to reflect his effort in creating such asituation in which the characters represent their meaningless lives.Freud, in his letter to Wilhelm Fliess, mentioned that “being entirely honest with yourself is a good exercise”(Freud 1961: 3), but none of the characters in this play are honest with themselves; in fact, none of them could adapthimself for the role born in and just try to escape from reality to illusion what Freud believes as an escape from lifeto death. As Freud states each individual’s identity is rooted in his id and as the unconscious part of his personality,but the superego or the ideal ego will never exist if a man is not aware of his inner “I”, so there would be no selfreorganization or self-identification at all. He also claims that this self-identification happens when someone is lookingfor his “I”. Six Characters shows a free challenge for each individual to get rid of his mistakes and look for his innerself. It goes to light the way of intellect for the modern minds to escape from the darkness of the world they trappedin and wants to save human being from a woven web of illusion they are involved in.CONCLUSIONPirandello used the familiar metaphors of life as a stage and the individual as a player to convey philosophicalinsight into the human condition in the modern world. This playwright dramatizes several continuing themesthroughout his literary production: the fluid mutability of identity, the interaction of reality and illusion and the781

J Nov. Appl Sci., 3 (7): 777-782, 2014relationship of life and art. His special view to human identity in most of his works—and in his Six Charactersparticularly—is part of his attempt to implicate his audience in a story narrated by modern individuals and he wantsto reconstruct new human beings with the ability of recognizing themselves. He creates a scene with charactersand actors to exemplify “the dialectical rapport of form and life” (Bassanese, 106-107) to mirror the relative conceptof identity and to show different potential of human’s mind for understanding their self-beliefs. He tried to change orat least affect the modern drama moving in the way that helps the world to change. While he uses fantasy as hisbase of inspiration, one may call his writing method, symbolist, but “he declared that he hated symbolic art, whichin its need to be allegorical destroyed all spontaneity” (Styan, 80).The analysis and dissolution of a unified self are carried to an extreme in his Six Characters where the stagecan be the symbol of appearance versus reality. Pirandello portrays the notion of self-identity as the border line ofreality and illusion and tries to emphasize that when someone answers what is reality and what is illusion then hecan answer who he really is.Though Pirandello finishes his play in a kind of delusion and sorrow, his attempts in searching for an authorare not only making a cliché scene in which some common individuals looking for their own identity to answer theirpersonal questions, he is indeed looking for the notion of human self-identification generally. And it is in SixCharacters that one “finds the most dramatic representation of the delusion of personality” (Starkie, 42). As Pirandelloshows in his play, the lack of self-identification causes misunderstanding of the world and the other human beings.Pirandello tries to show that not only the reality of characters is deeper than that of the actors but also it is deeperthan the reality of the real people. He puts emphasis on reality and illusion, form and life, understanding and lack ofunderstanding and places objectivity against subjectivity.Pirandello tries to play with the language as a strong tool—and the genre of drama as a more touchable genre—to convey the deep suffering a real man or an intellectual man uses to stand in order to save himself from a horribleself-storm, to find a real shore out of the dark seas of illusion. His attempts are to portray a family, which is ready formetamorphosis, for changing, for understanding about their self-identities. Therefore Pirandello is not an absurddramatist of his own time, rather he is an intelligent dramatist who reminds people to play their role at all the timesand asks them to look for their authors.REFERENCESBassanese FA. 1997. Understanding Luigi Pirandello: Understanding Modern European and Latin American Literature. Carolina:U of South Carolina P.Caputi AF. 1988. Pirandello and the Crisis of Modern Consciousness. Illinois: U of Illinois P.Freud EL. 196

Pirandello’s audience in modern time are modern men with modern way of thinking, some people disagree with another ‘self’, some modern bodies with new minds whose beliefs could destroy surfaces and open inner places, inner wounds, and inner emptiness. In his time, ‘relativity’,